'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'

Monahorns said:
More evidence that science is never settled and there must be ongoing challenges of all scientific understandings.
Click to expand...
could not agree more. especially as it relates to a highly complex system like climate. I personally think there is enough evidence (not yet "proof") that CC is happening that we should invest some money into substantial conservation efforts and even in alternative fuels and batteries, but we certainly don't have "proof" or even overwhelming evidence yet. And even if you have overwhelming evidence of CC you still need big evidence that your actions can do anything to impact it. We don't have that, so it is not settled science. However, many other things that are not settled science get attention, funding and action plans. That is where we should be right now. Not acting like it isn't real, but also not acting like we absolutely have all the answers and need to dismantle everything carbon in the next 2 decades.
 
Any negative effects of CC should be addressed by technology and economic progress. Batteries, solar, wind are big wastes of money. Make energy less expensive and continue to build wealth via capitalism.
 
I read an interesting article on the stupidity of anyone who thinks solar/electric cars are a current solution or even part of the solution
Solar panels don't work at night.
Or on cloudy rainy snowy days
The panels are mostly made in China using massive coal plants.
The amount of co2 it takes to make one is far more than they save in use
Their peak efficiency is 3_4 hrs a day and that degrades every year of use.
They have a lifespan of up to 25 years. What will be done with the millions and millions of used panels with their toxic chemicals
Panels toxic chemicals leach into ground during use.

Electric cars, How much energy does it take to produce a battery?
How long does a battery last? What happens to old batteries.
How much electricity will be needed to charge large numbers at night?
Where is the capacity going to come from to charge all these cars ?
Think of an average apartment/condo complex. Think of how many will drive home from work and plug their cars in.

Of course new technologies will help with time to perfect
But Calif with its' mandate of no gas powered machines including generators after 2024 is a classic example of short sightednness.
 
Last edited:
127800464_10157888497890186_4574973428295654090_n.jpg
 
Horn6721 said:
I read an interesting article on the stupidity of anyone who thinks solar/electric cars are a current solution or even part of the solution
Solar panels don't work at night.
Or on cloudy rainy snowy days
The panels are mostly made in China using massive coal plants.
The amount of co2 it takes to make one is far more than they save in use
Their peak efficiency is 3_4 hrs a day and that degrades every year of use.
They have a lifespan of up to 25 years. What will be done with the millions and millions of used panels with their toxic chemicals
Panels toxic chemicals leach into ground during use.

Electric cars, How much energy does it take to produce a battery?
How long does a battery last? What happens to old batteries.
How much electricity will be needed to charge large numbers at night?
Where is the capacity going to come from to charge all these cars ?
Think of an average apartment/condo complex. Think of how many will drive home from work and plug their cars in.

Of course new technologies will help with time to perfect
But Calif with its' mandate of no gas powered machines including generators after 2024 is a classic example of short sightednness.
Click to expand...
The biggest problem with your argument is that most of this is based on "right now..." thinking. If we judged every technology by how it performed in its nascent phases then we would not have developed most of the crap we have today. Most of these technologies are not yet ready for full scale deployment but they have all advanced a great deal in the last 20 years. I'm of the opinion that nuclear should be about 50% of our mix with other renewables at about 25% and gas plants still in play to handle the other 25% and surges in demand. That mix is not easily achieved and would likely require a 20 year ramp to get it all situated in the right mix and geographies but it would make us resilient in ways that we are not now.
 
One other thing that should be a greater talking point in all of this us conservation. Right now residences account for about 22% of energy use. I donated some money and followed a Veteran home build in DFW. The energy footprint of that home is microscopic compared to my own home. It took additional focus and effort to do all the insulation and such but it reduced their consumption by about 90%. We could probably find 12-15% just through conservation.
 
BOSE
If you read my post I clearly state technologies will evolve to move in that direction.
But to force it now will cause more problems than help.
What was done in that construction was a good logical evolution that construction has always taken..
Thank you for doing that.

I haven't seen any plans or ideas on what to do with worn out solar panels or EVO batteries.
Shouldn't that be part of the push to use these?
 
Last edited:
Horn6721 said:
BOSE
If you read my post I clearly state technologies will evolve to move in that direction.
But to force it now will cause more problems than help.
What was done in that construction was a good logical evolution that construction has always taken..
Thank you for doing that.

I haven't seen any plans or ideas on what to do with worn out solar panels or EVO batteries.
Shouldn't that be part of the push to use these?
Click to expand...

A for instance would be this; is it required to cover every roof top with panels that are worse than without for us to evolve technologically? We know the problems. Should we pause until such time as the problems are mitigated?

But that would run counter to a political goal and the money flow.
 
What’s the word for laughing and barfing a little in your mouth at the same time?

 
Everyone’s least favorite woke scold, G Theunberg, is attending the conference of
the rich and famous in Scotland. I wonder what non-plane she used to get there -
I’m guessing a ship rowed by galley slaves, but whipped with locally sourced, organic Cat of 9 Tails.

No word yet if she’s going to have a meeting with Depends. If she does, I’d advise her to look into a historical European invention beforehand - the Chastity belt!

Otherwise, Biden will try to finger rape her like the did his poor staffer, Tara Reade. If you see Slow Joe coming out of their meeting with a dull(er than usual) look on his face, smelling and licking his finger, you know she didn’t use proper precautions when meeting with a pervert.
 
Last edited:
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 10:07 AM PT – Wednesday, November 3, 2021
Republican lawmakers are requesting information on carbon emissions used to transport government officials to the COP26 summit in Glasgow.

In a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on Tuesday, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), along with two others, said Joe Biden and 13 members of his cabinet used jets to travel to the Glasgow climate summit. The lawmakers said Democrat officials also used extensive motorcades to travel around the town while visiting.

Republicans said this shows the hypocrisy of Democrat officials trying to restrict travel for everyone else due to so-called climate change, but enjoying carbon-based transportation themselves.

Republican senators are now asking the GAO to calculate the “total amount of carbon emissions” resulting from Biden’s travel to the Glasgo’ summit.
 
Hallam was right about the problems that would be facing Europe, he just guessed wrong regarding the source of those problems....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top